Jump to content
16 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

A California judge on Tuesday granted Apple's motion to dismiss counterclaims on the part of unauthorized Mac clone maker Psystar, who charged the Mac maker with violating antitrust laws through its vigorous attempts to block third parties from selling rival Mac OS X-based computers.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/11...nterclaims.html

 

Related stories by Google here:

http://news.google.com/?ncl=1272022313&hl=en&topic=t

Guest cavallo
I am just wondering how much the judge got paid by Apple.

 

Apple had probably paid earlier to protect future situation like this.

We don't even know how much Apple still pays rights to protect this situation as federal and world laws ask.

I any case also if the result was different, you see it here everyday, as problems, Apple is an hardware project fisrt and then software.

Without hardware project nothing better and cheaper than Apple will seem a Mac, don't worry, my friend.

Apple wins antitrust fight with Psystar, judge tosses claims

Apple isn't a monopoly; judge calls clone maker's arguments 'contradictory'

 

 

http://www.computerworld.com/action/articl...;intsrc=hm_list

 

However, Apple's case against Psystar is still a go.. set for Nov 2009.

HMM i Called this new it would happen just had to post it here seeing as how the fun htread got closed :(

 

And they do have to pay to get the copywrites to even their stuff ... like every other compnay so i suppose the judge went with Due proccess i mean if everyone wasnt entitled to their company's property this wouldnt be good for anyone

just a mental exercise:

 

Microsoft sells an OS only,no HW. and is a monopoly as judged by the law

 

Apple sells an OS that ties into specificy hardware. and is NOT a monopoly.

;)

I'm not quoting research here, but IIRC the claim was that Microsoft tried to use their domination of the OS market to cripple competitor's software and force users to stay with their products (IIRC it was mostly a web browser issue). The monopoly case really had nothing to do with hardware IMO. It was all a quite messy issue with which I am still not sure I agree or disagree. If it is true that they deliberately wrote software which crippled netscape/whatever in Windows, that is a monopolistic move, but it is also possible that Netscape wasn't written as well as IE (did I just say that?).

 

Apple sells a hardware/software product, one is not really tied to the other, they are a single product together. Apple hardware is perfectly capable of running competitor's software, this is one of the features they tout. So, what exactly do they have a monopoly on? Their own product? Everyone has and always will have the option of shopping elsewhere for hardware and software. I have never seen any reason for Apple to offer any sort of 3rd party hardware support, when people have so, SO many other OS options. Some of which are decent. The whole philosophy of the Mac is that with strict control of the hardware the software experience can be guaranteed. It is the same as a lot of other types of products where the brand provides all aspects of the product, like a car dealer. Does BMW have a monopoly of the car market? Nope, just of BMWs.

 

And would you really want it any other way?

bmw_x5.jpg

 

The one thing that irks me (and many others) about Apple is their lack of variety in their hardware lineup. But, of course, this is up to them. I understand that.

Please, not this discussion again.. it's been done to death. Psystar's counter-suit was rejected, they may appeal, that is what this is about, not endless bleh about whether BMW is a monopoly, nor who you personally believe is in the right.

just a mental exercise:

 

Microsoft sells an OS only,no HW. and is a monopoly as judged by the law

 

Apple sells an OS that ties into specificy hardware. and is NOT a monopoly.

:(

 

I had to dig for this most frequent WRONG comment.

 

7. Apple is a monopoly

 

Boy it does look that way, doesn't it? I mean, the only way to use the Mac OS is to buy a computer from Apple. Well, wait, Apple isn't the only computer company you can buy from. You can buy from Dell, HP, etc. The only issue with that is you have to use Windows. Or Linux. But you can use Linux on a Mac too. Fact is there are lots of choices for your computing usage, and Apple represents just one of many many choices. It also represents one OS out of many many choices. And all of those choices are pretty viable choices.

 

Apple isn't preventing you from exercising your right to choice when it comes to what brand of computer you're using. You have a right to choose to use whatever brand of computer you want. You also have the right to choose whatever OS you want to use, even if those choices are limited by certain factors. Apple isn't forcing you to use their OS or buy their computers.

×
×
  • Create New...